You are here:

Beating the Odds: Teaching Italian online in the Community College Environment ARTICLE

, Bronx Community College

  • Full Text
  • Citation
  • Save to Collections
  • E-mail
  • Share
  • OpenURL

    • Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society Volume 11, Number 3, ISSN 1826-6223 e-ISSN 1826-6223 Publisher: Italian e-Learning Association

    Abstract

    This study analyzes data collected from Italian language online classes during the course of four consecutive semesters at Bronx Community College in order to measure the impact that distance learning has on students’ retention and success rates. The results reveal that reconfiguring the online meetings to a lower percentage and implementing social pedagogies and an “intrusive” teaching approach on the part of the instructor reduce the percentage of course abandonment and favor the creation of strong learning communities. Furthermore, the data relative to the grade distribution shows no substantial difference between online courses and face-to-face instruction.

    Citation

    Guarnieri, G. (2015). Beating the Odds: Teaching Italian online in the Community College Environment. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 11(3),. Italian e-Learning Association. Retrieved October 22, 2018 from .

    Keywords

    View References & Citations Map

    References

    1. Arnold N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord G. (2009), Assessing online collaboration among language teachers: Across-institutional case study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 121-139.
    2. Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2005), Using computer-mediated communication to establish social and supportive environments in teacher education. CALICO Journal, 22, 537-566.
    3. Bambara, C.S., Harbour, C.P., Davies, T.G., & Athey, S. (2009), Delicate engagement: The lived experience of community college students enrolled in high-risk online courses. Community College Review, 36(3), 219–238.
    4. Barrette, C.M. (2001), Students’ preparedness and training for CALL. CALICO Journal, 19(1), 5–36.
    5. Bocchi, J., Eastman, J.K., & Swift. C.O. (2004), Retaining the online learner: Profile of students in an online MBA program and implications for teaching them. Journal of Education for Business 79 (4): 245–53.
    6. Brown, B.W., & Liedholm, C.E. (2002), Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic Review, 92(2), 444–448.
    7. Cattan, M., White, J., & Learmouth, A. (2005), Preventing social isolation and loneliness among older people: A systematic review of health promotion interventions. Ageing and Society 25(1): 41–50, 2005.
    8. Cardoso, W. (2011), Learning aforeign language with a learner response system: the students’ perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 393-417.
    9. Cenoz, J. (2003), The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: A review. International Journal of Bilingualism, (7), 1-87.
    10. Cox, R.D. (2005), Online education as institutional myth: Rituals and realities at community colleges. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1754–1787.
    11. Curry, D.B. (2000), Collaborative, connected and experiential learning: reflections of an online learner, Retrieved July 19, 2010 from Academic Search Complete.
    12. Ellis, R. (1994), The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    13. Elola, I. & Ozkos, A. (2010), Collaborative writing: fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning& Technology, 14 (3), 51-71.
    14. Figlio, D.N., Rush, M., & Yin, L. (2010), Is it live or is it Internet? estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning. (NBER Working Paper No. 16089). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Fose, L. Mehl, M. (2007), Plugging into students’ digital DNA: Five myths prohibiting proper podcasting pedagogy in the new classroom domain. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3), 277–287.
    15. Garrison, R.D. (2007), Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61–72.
    16. Gunawardena, C.N. (1995), Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147–66.
    17. Heins, B., Duensing, A., Stickler, U., & Batstone, C. (2007), Spoken interaction in online and face-to-face language tutorials. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(3), 279-295.
    18. Jackowski, M. & Akroyd, D. (2010), Technology usage among community college faculty. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 34: 624–644.
    19. Jaggars, S.S. & Xu, D. (2010), Online learning in the Virginia community college system. New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. Retrieved August 10, 2012 from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?uid=813
    20. Jaggars S.S. (2011), Online learning: Does it help low-income and underprepared students? New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center CCRB Brief (52) Retrieved August 10, 2012 from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu
    21. Jones, C.L. (2008), Listening comprehension technology: building the bridge from analog to digital. CALICO Journal, 25 (3), 400-419.
    22. Kabata, K., & Wiebe, G. (2005), Challenge of developing and implementing multimedia courseware for a Japanese language program. CALICO Journal, 22(2), 237–250.
    23. Keim, J., von Destinon, M., Stroud D., & Dennis R. (2010), Gender and ethnicity among community college students: The relationship between Adlerian themes, Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 34(12), 957-965.
    24. Kennedy, C. & Miceli, T. (2010), Corpus-assisted creative writing. Introducing intermediate Italian learners to a corpus as a reference resource. Language Learning& Technology, 14 (1), 28-44.
    25. Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010), Developing collaborative autonomous learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: attention to meaning among students in wiki space. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 41-58
    26. Khatib M. & Khodabakhsh, M. (2010), The effect of modified speech on listening to authentic speech. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(5), 285-293.
    27. Kraemer, A. (2008), Formats of distance learning. In S. Goertler & P. Winke (Eds.), Opening doors through distance language education: Principles, perspectives, and practices (pp. 11–42). San Marcos, CA: CALICO.
    28. Krashen, S.D. (1988), Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.
    29. Mackey, A. (2005), Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, (27) 3, 405-430.
    30. McInnerney J. And Roberts, T. (2004), Online learning: social interaction and the creation of a sense of community. Educational Technology& Society Journal, 7(4), 73-81.
    31. McKinney L. (2010) Evaluability assessment: laying the foundation for effective evaluation of a community college retention program. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 34: 299–317.
    32. Mei, M. (1991), Learning language through content: Learning content through language. Foreign Language Annals, 24(4), 281-295.
    33. Mitchel R. & Myles, F. (1998), Second language learning theories. London: Hodder Education Publishers.
    34. Munro. M.J., Derwing, T.M. (2001), The effects of speaking rate on the comprehensibility and accentedness of L2 speech, Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23(4), 451-468.
    35. Lagier, J. (2003), Distance learning and the minority student: Special needs and opportunities. The Internet and Higher Education, 6 (2), 179-184.
    36. Liu, S.Y., Gomez, J., & Yen, C.-J. (2009), Community college online course retention and final grade: Predictability of social presence. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2),165–182.
    37. Peal E., Lambert M. (1962), The relation of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological Monographs 75 (546), 1–23.
    38. Reilly, T. (1988), Approaches to foreign language syllabus design. Eric Digest. Eric Clearinghouse on Languag and Linguistics. Retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/design.html.
    39. Sanz, C. (2000), Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: Evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics (21), 23–44.
    40. Schopieray, S. (2003, November), Exploring collaboration and cooperation in the online Classroom. Presented at Midwestern Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Columbus, OH.
    41. Scida, E.E., & Saury, R.E. (2006), Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 517–531.
    42. Somenarain, L., Akkaraju S., & Gharbaran, R. (2010), Student perceptions and learning outcomes in asynchronous and synchronous online learning environments in a biology course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching (JOLT),6(2). 353-356.
    43. Smith D., & Ayers, D. (2006), Culturally responsive pedagogy and online learning: Implications for the globalized community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 30, 401–415.
    44. Swan, K., & Shea. P. (2005), Social Presence and the Development of Virtual Learning Communities. In: Hiltz, S. And Goldman, R. (Eds.), Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks, 239-260. Mahwah,NJ.
    45. Tschirner, E. (2001), Language acquisition in the classroom: The role of digital video. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14, (3-4), 305-319.
    46. Wagener, D. (2006), Promoting independent learning skills using video on digital language laboratories. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(4/5), 279-286.
    47. Weininger, M.J., & Shield, L. (2003), Promoting Oral Production in a Written Channel: An Investigation of Learner Language in MOO. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(4), 329-349.
    48. Xu, D., & Jaggars, S.S. (2010), Comparing online and face-to-face learning outcomes in an English composition course across a community college system. (Working Paper No. 31. CCRC Assessment of Evidence Series). New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center. Retrieved on June 18 from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu
    49. Zeiss, E., & Isabelli-García, C. (2005), The Role of Asynchronous Computer Mediated Communication on Enhancing Cultural Awareness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 151-169.

    These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

    Links